Thanks for the reply.

So to continue the figure of speech, the "camera" started with film and then added the chassis, lens, etc. — Bitter Crank

Yeah, in minor evolutionary increments, such as to give the impression of determinism with a small amount of randomness causing variation.

I don't know. DNA, and proximity to same and other cell types seems to be part of how cells organize themselves into tissues and organs. But then, one step back, why did DNA and the cells begin self-organizing in the first place? — Bitter Crank

I think its because self organization is the nature of our universe. There isn't an alternative course of action - you either self organize, or you become part of something else's self organization. Self organization seems to drive evolution, whilst natural selection culls non viable self organization, so in the long run the self organization improves.

an apple seed, and the apple, can occupy the same place at the same time.
— Don Wade — Pop

What you have stated here is not logical. Two things cannot occupy the same space at the same time. because if they did then they would be the same thing. Whilst a seed is within an apple, an apple is not within a seed. An apple does not occupy the same space as the seed. It occupies more space then the seed. I think your point needs rephrasing. — Pop

Thanks again for your response! Then let's look at the question: "When is an apple seed an apple seed?" I believe that while the seed is still in the apple it is still a seed. (Even though it is also part of the apple, at the same time.) The seed doesn't need to be visible in order to exist. If we say the seed only exists when it's not in the apple would deny the seeds existence almost all the time. Apple seeds exist as does other masses. The problem is in our traditional way of perceiving the seed (in our mind) - not in the existence of the seed.

I think its because self organization is the nature of our universe. — Pop

Basic features like gravity led to the 'self-organized' formation of star systems galaxies, and galaxy groups just as earlier, basic physics led to the formation of atoms. If it wasn't for atoms and molecules self-connecting there would not be any life.

So, I find a lot of credence in your assertion that the universe is self-organizing.

Yeah, in minor evolutionary increments, such as to give the impression of determinism with a small amount of randomness causing variation. — Pop

Our pattern seeing, purpose detecting proclivities seem to lead us to determinism of one sort or another. God intended, the laws of physics required, evolution insists on... But given the vast amount of time that short-lived organisms have had to develop, the deterministic rule might be "If it 'works' it stays."

Good discussion.

But given the vast amount of time that short-lived organisms have had to develop, the deterministic rule might be "If it 'works' it stays." — Bitter Crank

Yes, or If a niche works it stays filled.

I find a lot of credence in your assertion — Bitter Crank

I arrived at it in my own quirky way, but its an idea that really belongs to systems and complexity theory.
The first contemporary exponent, that I'm aware of, was a genius who died quite young. Erich Jantsch wrote "the self organizing universe" in 1951. Since then there have been others, and of late Neil Theise is probably the loudest voice, but its not a widely encountered concept in my experience. It ought to be, imo, as its very powerful theoretically - as a concept that is the cause of everything!

Thanks again for your response! Then let's look at the question: "When is an apple seed an apple seed?" I believe that while the seed is still in the apple it is still a seed. (Even though it is also part of the apple, at the same time.) The seed doesn't need to be visible in order to exist. If we say the seed only exists when it's not in the apple would deny the seeds existence almost all the time. Apple seeds exist as does other masses. The problem is in our traditional way of perceiving the seed (in our mind) - not in the existence of the seed. — Don Wade

Sorry, but I'm not really following you. I accept that the seed and apple are enmeshed conceptually. But the logic of the enmeshment is quite clear. The relationship of the elements cause the whole - in this case an apple.

Sorry, but I'm not really following you. I accept that the seed and apple are enmeshed conceptually. But the logic of the enmeshment is quite clear. The relationship of the elements cause the whole - in this case an apple. — Pop

I understand Pop. I'm glad you communicated at all. Your "understanding" is what almost all people feel. It's not easy to convince people of new concepts.